You can grab the latest Lumia iteration on July 17th.

Share this story

Android users on T-Mobile got a new phone option today in the form of the waterproof Sony Xperia Z, but Windows Phone 8 fans won't be left out in the cold either: the company announced that Nokia's Lumia 925 will be available for purchase on July 17.

As we wrote in our initial hands-on with the device, on the inside it's not drastically different from the other Lumia 920-series phones. It has a dual-core Snapdragon S4 Plus SoC, 1GB of RAM, 16GB of internal storage, an 8.7MP PureView camera, and a 4.5-inch 1280×768 AMOLED display (the Lumia 925 also uses an AMOLED display, while the 920 uses an IPS panel). Its main change over those phones is that it exchanges their chunky plastic bodies for a slimmer frame made primarily of aluminum.

The initial down-payment on the phone is $49.99, plus an extra $20 on your phone bill every month for the next 24 months (bringing the final cost to a less wallet-friendly $529.99). This news comes a day ahead of Nokia's own press conference, at which the company is expected to take the wraps off of its next-generation Lumia 1020 handset.

Share this story

Andrew Cunningham
Andrew wrote and edited tech news and reviews at Ars Technica from 2012 to 2017, where he still occasionally freelances; he is currently a lead editor at Wirecutter. He also records a weekly book podcast called Overdue. Twitter@AndrewWrites

I'm a huge proponent for both Nokia and Windows Phone 8, and love my Lumia 920 dearly. But this seems like a terrible deal.

I don't think WP8 needs to be competing for bottom barrel customers in the way Android does, but charging that much for a device with yesterday's technology is just a bad idea. Yes, the specs are more than adequate for WP8, and they will provide an excellent experience. But they're fooling themselves if they don't realize they're competing against Android for people's wallets.

Windows Phone 8 might be a premium operating system. But it's not yet perceived that way; at least, not in America. If you're going to release a phone with those specs and charge a $20 premium per month, offer it free up front. Or charge $100 up front and don't have monthly payments, or have $5 payments.

I'm sure it's an excellent phone with excellent battery life and voice quality. It's a shame it won't be competitive due to dumb pricing on the part of T-Mobile.*

Having just switched to T-Mobile last month, it appears that the monthly payment plan + down payment = the upfront cost to own it outright. I'm disappointed the 925 is that much. Too rich for my blood.

I picked up the Lumia 521 for $150 outright and I'm pleased with it. Nothing is fantastic about it, but its a solid device and the family plan for 2 lines unlimited text and call plus 2.5 GB of 4G per line is $100 (plus all the crap fees and taxes). The plan also has mobile hotspot included.

Still waiting for a WP8 device with a physical keyboard to replace my HTC Arrive.

Moving from my Dell Venue Pro (slider w/nice keyboard) to the Nokia 610 has been way better than I could have imagined. The Nokia is just a better phone, the Nokia maps app is actually useful, the camera is good, etc. etc. etc.

After years with a BB, I didn't think I could give up a kb. Turns out it was relatively painless.

I just don't type out multi-paragraph emails on it any more, which is probably OK

I disagree with the characterization of the Lumia 920 as "plasticky." while it is made of polycarbonate, the word implies that it's cheaply-built or low quality. also, I believe Nokia is sacrificing their iconic look with the 925 and 928. so, I'm just venting.

Does the Ars stylebook require the writers to editorialize the T-mobile pricing this way?

$529.99 can look very wallet friendly to some. It depends on your perspective.

Yeah, I find it funny that $2000 phones on Verizon are cheap, but when T-Mobile doesn't try to hide the loan they're giving you, then $500 is expensive, despite being significantly cheaper than most of the phones Ars reviews.

If you're going to release a phone with those specs and charge a $20 premium per month, offer it free up front. Or charge $100 up front and don't have monthly payments, or have $5 payments.

You realize this is exactly the same ripoff offered for every other phone unless you pay upfront, right? The only thing that matter is the total price, and $530 is a pretty normal price (significantly cheaper than an iPhone 5 or Galaxy S4, significantly more expensive than a Nexus 4).

Having just switched to T-Mobile last month, it appears that the monthly payment plan + down payment = the upfront cost to own it outright. I'm disappointed the 925 is that much. Too rich for my blood.

T-Mo's #2 selling point is that you don't subsidize your phone through your monthly bill after you've paid the upfront costs. If you do choose to make monthly payments, there's no finance charge, so you don't pay "extra" either way

Quote:

I picked up the Lumia 521 for $150 outright and I'm pleased with it. Nothing is fantastic about it, but its a solid device and the family plan for 2 lines unlimited text and call plus 2.5 GB of 4G per line is $100 (plus all the crap fees and taxes). The plan also has mobile hotspot included.

Same here, although we are sticking with the 500MB plan unless we get throttled. There is no reason to pay for more until you have confirmed that you need more, since they don't charge for overages, they just throttle your speed.

My one main complaint is that I can't get the phone numbers in my contacts from my old SGS to sync over via Gmail. All the names come over, just no phone numbers.

Edit to add: do Arsians *need* the bells and whistles of the flagship phones? If so, why? I'm just curious.

No, that's your final price @ $20 a month. You have the option of paying in full or monthly installments. I think you have to pay taxes up front, however. The author is clearly butthurt that he has to pay $120 (or more) a month for two years, just so he can get an iPhone for $199.

Call me crazy, I like the heft and feel of the 920. I am sure this is nice as well, but I am quite content with my 920. Heck, I made it a tad thicker by putting a funky cover on the back (not cause I am worried about the phone, but cause it was funky).

Having just switched to T-Mobile last month, it appears that the monthly payment plan + down payment = the upfront cost to own it outright. I'm disappointed the 925 is that much. Too rich for my blood.

T-Mo's #2 selling point is that you don't subsidize your phone through your monthly bill after you've paid the upfront costs. If you do choose to make monthly payments, there's no finance charge, so you don't pay "extra" either way

Quote:

I picked up the Lumia 521 for $150 outright and I'm pleased with it. Nothing is fantastic about it, but its a solid device and the family plan for 2 lines unlimited text and call plus 2.5 GB of 4G per line is $100 (plus all the crap fees and taxes). The plan also has mobile hotspot included.

Same here, although we are sticking with the 500MB plan unless we get throttled. There is no reason to pay for more until you have confirmed that you need more, since they don't charge for overages, they just throttle your speed.

My one main complaint is that I can't get the phone numbers in my contacts from my old SGS to sync over via Gmail. All the names come over, just no phone numbers.

Edit to add: do Arsians *need* the bells and whistles of the flagship phones? If so, why? I'm just curious.

I went with the 4G upgrade for my phone because I do use 2GB+ every month. It also offers up the mobile hotspot feature, which is great since my job is in the field. It lets me do work stuff on bigger devices without having to find a free WiFi spot.

It has a dual-core Snapdragon S4 Plus SoC, 1GB of RAM, 16GB of internal storage, an 8.7MP PureView camera, and a 4.5-inch 1280×768 AMOLED display (the Lumia 925 also uses an AMOLED display, while the 920 uses an IPS panel).

I think in the parenthesis it should be "the Lumia 928 also uses an AMOLED display, while the 920 uses an IPS panel".

Nice, launching just as the 1020 is announced. Way to Osbourne your erstwhile flagship...

It won't be available on the same carriers and there's also good reasons to think the Lumia 920 will look thin and light compared to the upcoming 1020. Unless you absolutely want the latest devices for the same of getting the latest devices...I how they won't get their Lumia range more confusing than it is already though.

Edit to add: do Arsians *need* the bells and whistles of the flagship phones? If so, why? I'm just curious.

You know, that just brings home something I watched recently. I was watching The Sarah Connor Chronicles and Sarah (Lena Headey) is picking up some phones. After hearing about all the great things it has and can do she asks....

"And what happens if I press these numbers here? These numbers, one through nine? If I press seven of them, will someone talk to me through the ear part up here?"

That kind of highlights my thoughts on the whole thing. I use my phone pretty much for just communicating myself (talk/text) but the trend towards every phone maker is bigger/bigger/bigger - exactly what I don't need and or want, and almost every phone is just too damn big - which is why I still have my several years old LG Opt S (running CM9)

The article starts as if Android users have their phones and Windows users have theirs... I'd say this is a great phone for an Android user that wants a solid phone with great camera that never lags, freezes up or needs a reboot. And yes, despite the cries of denial, there are lots of old unsupported Android phones out there like that.

As someone who has a Nokia 920 with virtually the same camera, the Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) in it is amazing. Videos of the kids are no longer shaky. And the Family Room is great at allowing the kids to play with your phone without texting or calling the world.

As for price, it's cheaper than other T-Mobile premium phones like the iPhone/S4.

If price is an issue and you want a quality budget phone, not much beats the Nokia 521 which is often available for $129... with unlimited monthly data plan for only $40 from Walmart.

So that's about 9 - 10 months after the 920 dropped. To me, switching to At&t to get the phone I really wanted seems totally worth it then.

Like in usual Tmobile fashion... if I were to get the 925 now, by the time its paid off, At&t would have the next flagship (NOT talking about the 1020 either, but that could be used as an example).

I miss the slightly cheaper (but not by much) monthly bill I had on Tmo, but I've been doing just fine on At&t so far. So far so good.

Also... I have a 32GB 920. There is no 32GB 925... that SUCKS.

Also, agree that the plastic-comment is silly. Hold my 920 in one hand while holding my wife's GS3 in the other hand... the Sammie is lighter, but feels cheaper. Besides, I had an HD2 back in the day... what is the hard-on for metal phones? I don't get it.